Category Archives: Gender differences

The discussion of gender in the church is more than a two-position conversation

47 Replies

Bathroom-gender-signWell, we’re back in a discussion on gender. It will be a limited one this time; I really want to finish the study of baptism that we’ve been doing.

But I have a few more things to say on this matter, a little more pot stirring to do, so we’ll give this topic the rest of this week.

One of my concerns about this topic specifically and current public discourse in general is the tendency to reduce all issues to two choices. You’re pro-life or pro-abortion. You’re liberal or conservative. In this discussion, you’re complementarian or egalitarian. (with my spell checker showing as little pleasure with the word complementarian as I feel)

I think it would greatly help this discussion if we could recognize that views on this issue cover a wide range of opinions and beliefs. It’s not yes/no or in/out. There are nuances and facets, themes and variations.

What if we thought about the differing views as a spectrum of ideas? This is still oversimplification, but it moves the discussion closer to the truth. Just for discussion’s sake, let’s call full egalitarianism E6 and the opposite extreme (misogyny) E0.

E0 sees women as inferior. They are to be silent in the church. Even singing is forbidden. Men and women don’t sit together. Women cover their heads in public, maybe even using veils.

E1 takes a slightly more generous view. Women may sing, but they are not to speak in the assembly. They may ask questions, respond to questions, or read Scripture in a Bible class setting; they may not pray nor teach. They may teach women, but only if there are no men present at the time.

E2 allows women to fully participate in church… as long as they do not do so from a standing position or from the front of the auditorium. They might be allowed to answer direct questions during the assembly or make prayer requests.

E3 lets women make announcements or give testimony in the assembly. They are restricted from anything that smacks of having authority over men or teaching.

E4 feels that women can pray or read scripture, based on 1 Corinthians 11. They are still restricted from authority or teaching, based on 1 Timothy 2.

E5 feels that women can do just about anything that men can in the assembly. The only restriction is that the eldership is still seen as a male domain.

E6 sees no difference between what men and women can do or be in the church.

Most points of the spectrum feel that those toward the lower end from them are a bit legalistic and those to the higher end a bit liberal. People at the far ends (E0-E1 and E-6) may feel that their view is the only possible view, the only one that is truly grounded in Scripture. Most of those toward the middle of the spectrum recognize the possibility that other views may be as acceptable as theirs.

That’s my proposal, artificial though the distinctions may be. Personally, I’m willing to allow each congregation to find its identity, answering not to me but to the Lord as to the correctness of their views. There is one view that I reject outright: the view that damns others that don’t share their viewpoint.

Baptism, gender, and Galatians 3

66 Replies

waterA post about gender differences in the church doesn’t really have a place in a series on baptism. Just as a talk about gender and the church doesn’t really fit a Bible lectureship about baptism and the Lord’s Supper. That’s how I see it. But not everyone shares my opinion.

The recent Pepperdine lectures were built around themes from John Mark Hick’s new book on baptism and the Lord’s Supper. I’ve read previous works by John Mark on these subjects, so I imagine this one should be excellent. Jarrod Robinson was invited to speak on Galatians 3:26-28 and titled his talk “Our Baptismal Vows.” He gave a talk that has garnered much attention, emphasizing his beliefs that there are no differences between what men and women can do in the church.

Personally I feel that Jarrod was set up to fail. Not that he didn’t give a very good talk. But his verse assignment pushed verse 28 to the forefront of the discussion. You either focus on the verse that discusses baptism or you expand your focus to include the whole paragraph. It’s either 3:26-27 or it’s 3:26-29. Otherwise, you’re turning what should be an exposition of Scripture into an agenda-driven talk. Which was what we got from Jarrod.

Not to say he didn’t do a good job. It was an effective talk. But it wasn’t Galatians 3.

(I should note that I raised these concerns in a group that John Mark Hicks is a part of. In response, he wrote a blog post on the subject. I think he’s reaching a bit to find a parallel between Joel and Galatians 3. It’s also hard to connect this reasoning with the topic under discussion in Galatians. But you can read his article and decide for yourself.)

The original hearers of the book of Galatians wouldn’t have heard the letter read and come away talking about 3:28. It’s a minor point in the letter. If anything, they would have discussed it in relation to their situation and the topic Paul was discussing… which was not about gender roles in the church (and was about whether or not believers had to be circumcised to be a part of the community of faith. Merely reading the verse with that in mind steers you in the proper direction)

Toward the end of his talk, Jarrod kept repeating the phrase: “We’re baptized believers. We’re better than this,” while discussing the limiting of the role of women in the church. An effective rhetorical device, but not one that leads to good examination of a text. I could say, “Let’s not just follow the whims of culture. We’re baptized believers. We’re better than this.” Good rhetorical device; less than helpful for improving understanding.

If you’d like to listen to Jarrod’s talk, you can see it on YouTube. Or search for it on iTunes.

I want to spend some time discussing this passage further before moving on to other passages on baptism (which is what we’ve been studying the last few weeks). I look forward to your comments, as always.

Resources to continue studying about gender differences in the church

Leave a reply

Bathroom-gender-signI’d like to leave the subject of gender differences, at least for a bit. We’ve spent several months on this topic. We’re far from exhausting all that could be said, but I’d like to touch on some other topics.

But before we take a break, let me leave you with some reading in case you’d like to continue digging on this topic. I’m going to limit the resources to those addressing the topic from within the churches of Christ. That’s not meant in any way to disparage other voices; I have merely chosen to limit the resources a bit. Don’t feel bound by the same limit; feel free to point to other resources in the comments.

Two who have been participating in the conversation in the comments section (Jen and Kristen) write regularly on this subject. Their websites are a good place to start for an alternative viewpoint to what I’ve presented:
Gal328.org
Woman, The Glory of Man

I referred to Jay Guin’s Buried Talents before, but I’ll link to it again: Buried Talents

Al Maxey has quite a number of articles about gender in his Reflections. Here are a few that I’d suggest for now:
Women in the Church
Women in Public Ministry
Emerging Women’s Roles

Ben Giselbach answered a series of questions about women in the church, presenting what I consider to be answers representative of the traditional teaching in churches of Christ:
Does God give men and women equal leadership capacities in the church?

That should be a good start. As I said, feel free to offer suggestions of other resources in the comments section.

Spiritual giftedness and gender

31 Replies

Bible studyWe’ve been talking on and off about the subject of gender differences since October of last year. I don’t really want to carry over into February, so I’ll offer a few more thoughts and let the matter rest.

One sticking point for many people is the question of giftedness. That is, if men and women are equally endowed by the Holy Spirit with spiritual gifts, are we not resisting the Spirit if we limit the exercise of those gifts?

This, my friends, is a powerful argument, at least in my mind. As Nick pointed out the other day, Peter’s quote from the book of Joel in Acts 2 seems to point to a time when women and men will be receiving and using gifts from the Holy Spirit. And the rest of the book of Acts seems to bear that out, particularly when we see the daughters of Philip who are prophetesses.

But there’s something that troubles me, something that I brought up to Jen in one of my replies to her:

Something I want to discuss in a later post is something that I think very important: I believe that believers in the first century were as transformed by the Spirit as we are. Gifted by the Spirit.
So did the Spirit lead men to stifle the gifts of Spirit-filled women because of cultural concerns? Or did the Spirit wait until culture changed before gifting women for roles the culture wouldn’t accept?
My view is that the Spirit is much bigger than human culture and able to form a Christian community within any culture that transcends that culture. If he chose to use males to lead for centuries before the coming of Christ* and chose males to lead during Christ’s ministry and chose males to lead the church after Christ’s ascension, isn’t it quite possible that he had a plan in all of that? Even if we don’t understand all of the whys?

*Yes, there were exceptions at times when the men weren’t living up to what they were supposed to, but none of that changes what the norm was.

I’m wary of a chronological snobbery that says, “We finally got right what the church missed for hundreds of years.” I’m aware that there are some similarities to the issue of slavery, yet I can’t help but see differences as well. Slavery within the church was addressed even when the church abstained from waging a campaign to eradicate slavery in society. Even if the church wasn’t going to change Greco-Roman societal views toward women, major changes could have been implemented from the very beginning of the church. And they weren’t.

Some claim that any who advocate a difference in the activities of men and women in the church are guilty of sin. I can’t help but note that the early church was guilty of the same sin, if it be a sin. And I’m convinced that they too had the Spirit of God.

I don’t believe that spiritual giftedness is new to the last few centuries. I also believe that God’s Spirit was living and active in the first century church, as he is today.

The argument of spiritual giftedness, compelling though it seems, is not enough to lead us to say that God had a different practice in mind than what we see in Scripture: Active, spirit-filled women serving as missionaries and prophetesses, performing works of service and ministry, building up the church through their work, under the authority of male shepherds.

(Ben Witherington had a helpful post the other day on the subject of slavery, in the context of analyzing N.T. Wright’s work on Paul and The Faithfulness of God)

Silence or quietness? What does submission call for?

18 Replies

Bible studyWe saw in the last post that Paul, in 1 Timothy 2, was instructing Timothy about encouraging prayer in the church. He especially wanted the men to focus on praying instead of arguing and wanted the women to not focus on their outward appearance, but to focus on doing good things.

That discussion leads him to a related matter, still concerning men and women:

“Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.” (1 Timothy 2:11–15)

The ESV does a good job with the word they’ve translated “quietly” and “quiet.” For some reason, the KJV translators used the word “silence,” but that’s not a good reflection of the word. A different form of the word is used in verse 2 of this chapter to describe the lives that Christians are to seek; the KJV uses the word “quiet” in that instance and should have in this one. Paul isn’t telling women that they can’t speak at all; he’s telling them to be respectful.

The concept of submissiveness is still here. I know that we wrestle with that word, particularly because of modern connotations. We think of someone forcing someone else to submit, but that’s not the picture the New Testament paints. I think Ephesians 5 gives us a good idea of what submission looks like in a loving relationship. Mutual submission does not rule out some sense of hierarchy; it merely leads each party to seek the interests of the other.

Paul also warns against letting women teach or “exercise authority over a man.” There is controversy over the meaning of the second verb in that set (it’s a unique word used only here in the New Testament). I think it helps to see the contrast: she is to seek quietness. Her actions should not bring into question her submission.

Paul expresses this as a personal view, yet it’s a personal view based on theology, not merely culture nor pressing concerns. Even as we wrestle to understand his theological point, it’s foolish to argue that he doesn’t have one.

And then comes the enigmatic statement: “she will be saved through childbearing.” It’s a difficult statement to interpret (as Laymond noted, even Peter said some of Paul’s sayings were hard to understand). There are several possibilities. The only one that would really change our interpretation of these verses would be a strict literalist position that says that a woman is saved by giving birth.

I think Paul’s concluding words get overlooked. They seem to be the point of the whole thing: women are to continue in faith, love and holiness, and to do it in a proper way. (“temperate” is a good translation here, but we rarely use that word any more)

This passage fits well with Paul’s other teachings about men and women, even Galatians 3. There’s no need to pit one passage against another. Paul maintained the system of male leadership/headship that is seen throughout the Bible, giving much freedom to women, but cautioning them to use it within the framework of that system.